On my Callin podcast today, I will also, in the most reluctant manner possible, delve just a bit into the emerging "groomer" discourse over school curricula battles.
The sooner we start referring to the people that oppose free speech as “Democrats” and not refer to them as “liberals”, the sooner we can get back to actual liberalism. I spent my youth trying desperately to get out of an evangelical south laden with restrictions only to look up at my beloved New York City two decades on as it now houses the things I tried so desperately to escape.
They have taken the name and bastardized it. Same thing with 'Progressive' as the policies advocated by 'progressives' are largely regressive. It will take a long time to reclaim a word, in large part due to the widespread negative connotation it now carries.
The CCP redefined the word “progress” to mean “our way”. By definition, whatever the CCP espouses is “progress”. Our left hitchhiked onto the same definition from lots of sources.
They are about as left-wing as Greenwald, Rogan, and Bernie Bros. are right-wing…which I would argue is somewhere between “zero and no-chance” in my opinion.
Democrats are becoming more authoritarian in their attempts to squash any dissent. I recognize the behavior as I was steeped in it growing up a military brat in the Deep South where conformity of thought and action was not only encouraged, but rewarded.
The left as a party exists to implement the state.
Their entire platform is based around it. If their entire constituency were to somehow climb out of poverty (even assuming the unlikelihood of this), they would then no longer need the state, or the DNC, and thus, you see why they never actually want to fix anything.
Racism? Thats the same song they have been playing in DNC controlled cities since 1968. Perhaps people forgot Chicago.
Rigging elections? Thats the same song they have been singing since Hinky Dink Kenna in the 1900's. Dominick Demuro is evidence it still goes on today. Perhaps people forget Truman defeating Dewey was long before the Chicago mob won it for JFK.
Welfare states? Again, the same song they have been playing since the original New Deal. Why aren't more people climbing out of poverty in DNC controlled cities? Can anyone really tell me West Baltimore isnt a drug infested slum like it has been since Pelosi's dad was mayor there?
The DNC is all talk, all bullshit, and this is why they HAVE to own the media. Without control of the media the DNC would literally not exist. Their coalition would crumble when their jewish constituency finds out that Obama is taking secret pictures with Louis Farrakhan, a hate criminal. Their coalition would crumble when their pro-women constituency finds out that Bill Clinton and Epstein are pals and Epstein and Ghislaine were in the WH when Bill was President.
Its all a mirage and the entire thing is predicated on the stupidity of the masses which is again why education is something they cannot get success on despite the US spending more than any country on earth on it.
What is weird is that all the electric autos in Calif. will need vast electric generating plants to supply the mega voltage to run these vehicles. Guess what that electric will be generated in other States and their citizens will have to bear the brunt of any pollution from those electric plants. IF States get into conflicts with places like Calif and cut off their electric I guess no one will be able to drive their cars. Mandating the conversion to electric really violates the idea that organic change is best and trial and error should be considered BEFORE rushing into some untried technology. Unintended consequences are usually fixable but when the entire state is run with electric autos, buses and trucks those consequences might be life threatening and economically disastrous. But lets keep allowing the incompetent government to dictate how everything is done and we will be as efficient as the Soviet Union with its' 5 year plans in the 1930's. Starvation, industrial stagnation, and a pretty misery laden life for its citizens. Gov. Newsom cannot even change a flat tire and he suddenly is an expert on the transportation needs of 20 million people. Typical government think by hubris ridden know nothings. Same bureaucrats Solzhenitsyn described in his book "Cancer Ward." Now they are appearing in every nook and cranny of American society. Best to vote these Communist lite politicians out asap.
The conversion is intended to eliminate competition from other energy sources… everything they say about climate, the environment and nuclear power is just patter to distract the marks (the state’s residents and businesses). Once there is only one source of baseline power and only one legal way to generate it, insiders will control whose fossil fuels are sold to electric utilities and at what price. This is the kind of thing (magnified a thousand-fold) that goes on is China under Chairman Xi, the head of the most prosperous crime family in China. In California, Jerry Brown’s family natural gas holdings stand to make them billions of dollars from no-bid contracts.
With most political decisions here is always a curtain to be pulled back. Nothing is decided in a vacuum and the bottom line is always the controlling factor. Jerry Brown and the Newsom's are kissing financial cousins along with the Getty family. All politics in Calif revolves around that troika of power brokers.
The Rockefeller family and others learned decades ago that getting family members elected to office just eliminated the middleman and allowed direct access to the U.S. Treasury and the policies that bedeviled business tycoons in the past. Trump was never an inner circle accepted billionaire within NYC society so his election alarmed the in crowd to the extent that all knives were out and the surrogates in government acted to upset his applecart. Had he been "one of them" all would have been A-okay and it would have been business as usual. Not a big Trumper but he generated a boatload of hostility for a guy who was not a Communist or a Nazi. His policies were pretty innocuous given the mass hysteria on the left. Mean tweets and a nasty attitude is nothing compared to the war mongering and corporate grifting that is the usual way of life in the D.C. swamp. Trump was responsible for NO American children getting killed or maimed in bogus "wag the dog" wars. He got peace agreements where progressives could get nothing but empty air. Yet he was castigated by the in crowd and their very vocal minions in the media. Seemed like manufactured outrage predicated on something other that his personality or perceived POV.
Nice way of neatly disposing of half of the electorate as evil people.
There are of course plenty of Democrats who don’t agree with what certain liberals are doing in terms of deplatforming and canceling people. The problem is that they don’t agree with your side that calling anyone who opposes them “traitors to the Constitution” is necessarily a better tactic, at least not in terms of eventual outcomes for the country.
Other that his ethical problems Old Joe is a low rent, serial liar with a pretty limited I.Q. A typical Peter Principal political who is in way over his head.
Problem is as POTUS he can do real damage with his casual ignorance and bumbling thought processes. This guy was the "joke of Congress" before Obama legitimized him in the eyes of many.
IF the election was rigged by Democrats and leftists they should be ferreted out and prosecuted. If not, somehow this election mimicked and appeared to be a rigged one that was covered up by the media and the Court system. Either way a disservice was done that should be exposed and its enablers identified and/or prosecuted.
Nah, there are definitely more. I’ve engaged on more than a few comment threads and Bill Maher’s was never one of them even once. I don’t believe he writes a blog, or am I wrong?
Would you be happier if I called those that oppose free speech a “basket of deplorables….irredeemable, etc.?” We are now playing by the rules that Democrats have made using their media lackeys.
Democrats are well aware that outsourcing censorship to private corporations like Twitter provides them cover because they then don’t have to actively use government power to censor, but the willingness to forego free speech by private means is a clear indicator of what they would do if they were able to get rid of the First Amendment.
If the GOP doesn’t want to be associated with the KKK they should denounce them at every turn. Same goes for Democrats and those among them that despise dissent.
Give me a break, there’s a huge gap between calling someone “deplorable” and calling them a “traitor” or suggesting, ever more overtly as time goes on, that they should be killed because they’re “not real Americans” or something else along those lines.
The left has gone off the rails with its canceling and deplatforming, I agree. But the right, while lauding free speech, uses it the same way that irresponsible leaders in the past often have, to whip up hatred and propel the country toward violent conflict. Please don’t try to convince me that lumping all ordinary Democrats together as “evil” or “destroyers” or “communists” or “traitors” or “not real Americans” is a strategy somehow specifically designed by the right to improve dialogue and enhance the functioning of government in this country.
I didn’t and still don’t think that Hillary lost because of Russia; I was called a “traitor” or a “Putin puppet” on numerous occasions by card-carrying members of the Democratic Party here in New York City by the self-deputized “elites” as a result. I am not calling Twitter a bunch of traitors, but I will call their executives a bunch of cowards for fearing what information or difference of opinion will do to our electorate.
SEE: Hunter Biden lap top.
Democrats are suffering from a classic case of projection. Calling for the investiagation / arrest of Tulsi Gabbard and Tucker Carlson while complaining about Putin behaving the same would make for great satire if it weren’t so scary.
Absolutely agree the left has quite a bit of cleanup to do when it comes to that laptop as well as Russiagate. And a fair amount of cleanup when it comes to pushing masks and lockdowns well beyond their limits of actual utility.
But I sense that the right has some cleanup to do when it comes to who won the 2020 election and what the significance of that J6 episode was. And maybe apologize for being completely wrong about the ultimate scope of the pandemic and the utility / safety of vaccines. Please don’t jump to the unwarranted conclusion from that last sentence that I support vaccine mandates, btw.
I’m fed up with both sides. At least I won’t have to vote in the next election, that’s 30 minutes of my life I can spend doing something more pleasurable and useful.
Revolver News has some interesting video from Jan 6th. Ray Epps has never been charged with a crime even though he was seen on video encouraging people to go into the Capitol.
As to the 2020 election there is more evidence coming out every day about fraud, widespread fraud. Zuckerberg's $400,000,000 bought a lot of poll workers.
We agree, not all Democrats agree with the far left-wing of their own Party. Trouble is the media either calls out moderates, Joe Manchin as one example, as not 'team players', or they're completely ignored for not seeking media attention. I can't name any moderates in either major Party precisely because media doesn't seek their opinions - they only want conflict as they believe it benefits them (the media) despite the ongoing decline in readership, viewership, and listeners. Legacy media simply doesn't care anymore about increasing the number of people consuming their product - yet get incensed by sites like Substack. While the two-Party system is clearly broken in the USA, it's the media that's preventing any kind of reconciliation of common ideas and what could be agreed upon between them.
Well, I think there could be some truth to that, but I think it’s primarily the fault of the extreme voices themselves. As you said, many of them gain money from this sort of activity and many of them also seem to like the attention.
There’s also a self-isolating process going on here, I think. As someone who doesn’t fit neatly into either the left or the right, it’s increasingly apparent to me that I’d be best off never opining on anything or talking to anyone about my views. If I tell a leftist that I’m fed up with the transgender campaigning or ideas like reparations or defunding the police, I’m told in short order that I’m homophobic and a racist. On the other hand, if I turn around and tell a conservative “Wait a minute, I happen to think we should do SOMEthing about climate change and don’t necessarily think Obamacare is entirely bad!”, I’m immediately ripped into as a communist who wants to confiscate everyone’s private property and turn the country into a gulag.
I think this is a large part of the reason why very, very many ordinary Americans try to avoid political debates completely.
"...I’d be best off never opining on anything or talking to anyone about my views." Interesting. Who on the right wants to censor or silence your opinions and viewpoint? I would agree that many on 'the left' don't want to hear a pro-Republican perspective and are actively seeking to prevent those speakers to have a forum on Facebook, Twitter and similar, corporately-moderated platforms. Have you been banned from any 'right' platforms for sharing your left-of-center thoughts on say, Palar? I have only one social media account I now rarely participate in - and now Substack - so I might be way off base in saying the right may completely disagree with some of your positions, but of those I am aware, none will try to, what the kids call, 'cancel' you.
Well, perhaps you have a thicker skin than I do but I don’t care to continue engaging with people who tell me repeatedly that I’m an evil person who should somehow be physically liquidated because I don’t agree with them on something. I honestly don’t think I’m exaggerating when I say that this has happened to me hundreds of times over the past three or four years.
It’s not just because it’s unpleasant, but also because it’s unproductive.
So I self-censor. I used to comment several times per day, now I comment perhaps once a week in a few select places and I find myself doing even that more and more sporadically as time goes on.
In other words, all this “free speech” doesn’t seem to be leading anywhere good. Moderate-minded people are increasingly turning away and the only people left standing are the extremists screaming at each other. Politicians let themselves be pulled along by the extremists because those are pretty much the only voices the politicians and their moneylenders and campaign managers hear and feel they need to pay attention to.
I guess my viewpoint is that what the left is doing is wrong - we should defend free speech absolutely. But at the same time I think the right is deceiving itself when it jauntily proclaims that free speech will ultimately lead to the downfall of powerful elites and reform of our political culture. On the contrary, I think the kind of free speech we currently have is instead emblematic of the terminal sickness of our political and social culture and a foretaste of the national breakdown, quite possibly violent, that’s coming sometime in the not-too-distant future.
The article is called "The Story of Us." It's the story of left commenters who were driven out from what YOU think are left sites - they're NOTHING like "left," but if all you know is that if it's not your version of right, it must be left, well, you'll see it all as "left," even though ... well, I might be wasting my keystrokes on that...
VERY unfortunately, a liar among "the group who managed to survive" sowed lies and dissent and managed to break even this stalwart group up, but that's a longer, sadder tale to tell...
what I'm saying is that the GENUINE left experienced this kind of behavior LONG before you on the right did. The culprits are the Neo-Liberals and they are NOT left.
Fair point as, based on caucus membership in Congress, half of the democrats are in crazyville (CPC and Democratic Socialists) while the other half are not. Combine that with the percentage of the population which believes in more than two genders, 18%, and you have 35-50% of the Democrats as crazed, while 50-65% are not.
There’s similar percentages of craziness about other things on the right, overall I’d say a good third of the entire population is crazy to some degree. As a physician I often have to tread rather carefully when patients start to talk politics extemporaneously in the exam room. What they say is often very entertaining, however.
As an old conservative, Rob, I hope non-extremist Democrats will vote in the mid-term election. Our right to vote is a precious gift for all U.S. citizens.
I think some of them are, look at Substack. Heck ruy texrria , the father of the coalition of the ascendant theory that dominated democrat group think has been hitting the panic button about the behavior of the democrats.
Liberalism is dead. It was replaced by "Progressiveism" which is also rather a joke because they look a LOT like the Falwell right from the 80's that were the exact opposite of Progressive.
I had an aunt who nearly broke my arm leading me up church steps. Then her kids made an unannounced visit to me in another city and harangued me for two hours to accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior. I thought they would never leave. I like attending Catholic Mass sometimes. Why be rigid?
Your right , this is a choice you should make without pressure. I believe your aunt and kids living a good life and being there for you when needed would be a far stronger argument for religion then being berated.
Agreed. The term Liberal must never be applied to today's woke left.
A few suggestions:
Woke Marxist ¹
Woke communist (Equity)
Woke Fascist (see Antifa)
Given CRT race essentialism maybe
Woke Nazis
White privilege,
Whiteness
Are Constructs that blame one ethnicity for all problems of the others reminds of Hitler's views of the Jew being responsible for keeping the chosen from their rightful place
¹ accurate since group identity politics is the extension of Marxism beyond the class struggle paradigm to the struggle of various Oppressor vs Oppressed Groups in the West. Designed to Foment conflict for revolution to Subvert prosperous Western society.
LOL! The GOP legislates infringements to free speech, as Florida's GOP did in their "Don't say gay" law that makes it illegal to discuss gender dysphoria and orientation issues in an age appropriate way, and it's the Democrats that are the problem! Right! This attitude is just bullshit. There is a problem with woke liberalism, but it is not the Democratic Party who has not legislated any such thing.
I created my screen-name back when George W Bush said he was a "Compassionate Conservative." But lately the L word supposedly covers Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and many other illiberal, right-wing Democrats.
I’ve got the popcorn out and a cold Mich Ultra to enjoy the Twitter v Musk showdown. I do wish their was more publication of the toddler themed meltdowns by the employees. Spring break is coming at a great time!!!
Considering many Twitter employees spent the last year writing algorithms with the goal of trying to bankrupt my family, and exclude us from society, for refusing an experimental medical treatment we don’t need that doesn’t work, I only feel so bad watching the tables flipped as a resume that includes Twitter quickly become a black ball. The potential outcomes of the offer by Musk certainly point towards some version of Musk wins or Twitter loses. 🍻
Bingo. It’s not a good investment at $50billion plus for other entities. It was worth $30billion, and falling, without Musk. Even if Gates or some other billionaire woketard makes an offer, Twitter’s reputation is toast, and it would be marvelous to watch Gates blow over $50 billion in an already dying company which would be accelerated by his purchase.
If the board rejects the offer, the institutional groups better get their checkbooks ready because they are the deep pockets to sue. One of the largest shareholder class action lawsuits awaits Twitter, the board, Blackrock, State Street, Vanguard if it goes that way - ar least for a company with such little market capitalization. The securities lawyers must be salivating.
This is also why people should hire brokers/ advisors that directly invest the money into individual stocks and bonds as opposed to dumping it all in mutual funds or even the ETF’s that are basically tax advantages mutual funds these days. Control of our own wealth with as few intermediaries as possible is key.
I think Social Media only survives with a subscription model where you have to pay to play.
The thing that makes Twitter to toxic is not Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, the Babylon Bee or the Republican National Committee.
It's that you can sign up without any serious attempt by Twitter to verify your identity. Why would they when their advertising revenue model is predicated on # of accounts?
And any subtweet is hardly worth consuming unless you head to Twitchy where they aggregate the best of the subtweets....then mock the original tweet.
Hard to believe that saying there are 2 sexes would get you banned, or suggesting that Joe Biden profited handsomely off his son's hoovering up corrupt cash all over the corrupt world.
With CCPA, GDPR , Do Not Sell My Data and other emerging privacy safeguards (cookie deprecation; app opt in for tracking by Apple)...what you are seeing at Substack and other media organizations (paywalls) will continue, which is dangerous since Twitter right now is the newspaper editor for most major daily newspapers. When you only write content for a paying audience, you have to tailor that content to your paying audience...which is how newspapers get far away from their 4th estate roots and end up being as woke as the Democrat Party.
Twitter, FB and Google's (and Microsoft and Apple) biggest sin is stealing news story content created by local media stations and monetizing it themselves without paying the local paper for the overhead, salaries and other costs involved wiht creating content.
It's like the sucker fish on the side of a shark....eating off little larvae until they can work their way into the shark where they then begin to eat out their heart and lungs.
Sorry...I know it's still breakfast time for some of you, but it's also important we call a spade a spade when a spade is in front of us.
I just hope the whole platform implodes and Fascibook follows in it's footsteps. Google is too well connected to government I think to be shut down now.
The left controls the mainstream media (aside from Fox), all the main newspapers (except for WSJ), Hollywood, K-12 education, social media moderators, Madison Avenue, academia, and corporate HR and PR departments.
And they still think they are the plucky oppressed rebel outcasts who are in danger of being silenced because Elon Musk might trim their ability to censor Wrongthink.
The left has zero, absolutely zero concept of its own hegemony.
Wait, you're telling me that the movement that has the fervent backing of the media, big tech, giant corporations, and the democratic party aren't REALLY #TheResistance?
They took the term and bastardized it, just as they did with 'Liberal' and 'Progressive'. For the DNC, those three words, democracy, liberal and progressive, mean the exact opposite of their true definitions.
The worst part of this is watching dipshit hacks like Robert Reich and Max Boot claim that allowing a libertarian view free speech is what dictators do.
Yes, Virgina. Hitler, Stalin and Mao were real limited government, free-market, free speech sort of dudes.
Which is why I call the first individual you name "Robert Reich III". I know that's now how he pronounces his name, yet he has the same Nazi/Soviet show trial views and the same authoritarian ones as well.
Somebody should ask how he knows what it felt like in interwar Berlin. I have a great sense that he has no fucking clue. He probably thinks that Liza Minelli and Joel Grey were *literally* there.
Thanks for also looking at 'grooming' Glenn. Why anyone should be teaching sex ed to kids is beyond me. I honestly don't think the Florida law goes far enough, that it should extend up to the age of consent, 16. Many children have issues going through puberty about their sexual identities. I for one in my mid teens thought I may be better off female than male, however that was puberty hitting me. With the woke nuts out there now, they would have forced me into some maniacal surgery and destroyed my life because they cannot comprehend that they do not know what is best for people.
I'm really curious to see how this WAR between Elon Musk and the Fascist/Communist tyrants of Twitter plays out.
And, if Elon Musk wins, I want to see if he will uphold Free Speech on Twitter, and restores the millions of Twitter accounts that those Fascist tyrants have DELETED, suppressed, suspended.
Edit to add: Elon Musk succeeded in taking over PayPal first, and then Tesla Motors. He is using exactly the same strategy to try and take over Twitter.
Contrary to what most people believe, Elon Musk was not the founder of PayPal, nor the founder of Tesla Motors. He took them over, and later claimed to be the founder of both. The Tyrants of Twitter will have a hard nut to crack, with Musk.
good question, Martha! I'm sure those deranged Twitter employees are in Full Panic mode... I bet Elon Musk has a Team ready to completely replace the current management.
About the censorship algorithms: it is not a difficult job to remove them: 3 skilled developers can do it in a week (or less)
If 1000 incompetent devrlopers have implemented the algorithms and then created dependencies to those algorithms all over the Twitter stack, which in all probability is correct, those 3 skilled developers will need at least a couple of months to entangle the mess.
And the policy was changed on both places THE EXACT DAY that Biden said the lab leak was possible.
If you think FB/Twitter is a private company, you're not paying attention. They're getting marching orders from the government -- a complete violation of the First Amendment.
Your likely right, personally I believe the Obama campaign and the democrat party were getting raw voter id data from the tech companies to aid in election strategies and targeting voters.
They are definitely in bed with the Biden White House. Psaki has more than once called these tech oligarchs out anytime the slightest bit of information that this administration doesn’t approve of gets out.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday the Biden administration is identifying “problematic” posts for Facebook to censor because they contain “misinformation” about COVID-19.
Psaki disclosed the government’s role in policing social media during her daily press briefing after Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called on companies to purge more pandemic posts.
The demand for censorship — and Psaki’s admission of government involvement — follows a series of flip-flops from health officials who contradicted themselves throughout the pandemic on issues such as mask efficacy, as well as censorship of claims that later gained credibility, such as the theory that COVID-19 leaked from a Chinese lab.
They're hacks who are in lockstep with the left. They're happy to do whatever it takes to please the left, not because they're afraid of the left, but because they are the left.
Do you really think twitter has to be coerced by the Biden administration to do things favorable to Biden?
I don't think they are under the command or they fully agree with the security state. But the tech companies have a mutually beneficial relationship with the feds, they know what their partners want and need.
Actually the lab leak dam broke somewhat after the Nicholas Wade Medium article. Soon after 'the scientists' published in PLOS their concerns, including Baric which opened the door to allow discussion. I often think the eZine Medium is used to signal the liberals what their masters ordain. Watching it unfold was remarkable. The Wade piece was quite cleverly constructed to a this/then that dance but the conclusion was obvious.
How good should we all feel about delivering private control of twitter speech to any one person, even the formidable Musk, also presumed the wealthiest person on earth. Perhaps Ayn Rand would approve.
In theory I agree it should be a common carrier or stripped of 230 protections because editorial decisions via policies and algorithms are still editorial decisions. Here in the real world where no political effort is being made to do that, and as the Democrat party in power pushes for outright Democrat control of speech, I find this an entertaining and wonderful development. It might be the push necessary to clarify 230 into doing what it was intended to do.
Yesss. Great fun now. Unintended consequences later. The story of civilization. But in view of the amazing fact that we haven't blown ourselves up yet, I too am hopeful...
From a purely selfish point of view, being 75, it's kind of a moot point for me, but not for my genes, which is the reality, for better or worse, of our 'natural state,' with the ironic twist that the headlong chaos of human culture, not genetics, is now in 'control' of the planet.
Your first sentence deserves praise; the rest is tribalism. You should let all that other shit go. WHY? Because if you want to achieve the goal of your first sentence being applied all that other shit has to go...
I disagree. Being realistic is not “tribalism.” The reality is no one we elect is doing anything about the suppression of free speech, which makes enforcement of 230 neutrality a theory or ideological goal that isn’t realistic at the moment. Acknowledging it is Democrats who want to control speech is not tribalistic, it is acknowledgement of objective reality. I’ll take progress over these endless waits for ideal everyday. Incremental progress is still progress. Waiting for perfect is a pipe dream. Denying reality is as ridiculous as claiming men can give birth.
Actually, the real _reality_ is that there are "those on the right" who also want to suppress free speech, just for different topics. My guess is that you are either ignorant of their desires or agree with them... I can't know.
You provide zero examples of those on the right suppressing speech. I can’t know what you think you are talking about unless you can articulate it specifically. Reality is easy to articulate, so why can’t you do it?
Am I opposed to child sexualization and race baiting aimed towards captive minors with no choice or agency in government funded schools? Absolutely!!! Forcing someone to listen against their will has absolutely nothing to do with the rights of speech. Moreover, my opposition tax dollars being spent on sexualizing children and outright groomer indoctrination is not “suppressing” speech. Nowhere in the constitution is government speech protected. Public school teachers are speaking on behalf of the government that funds them. Those teachers can say whatever they want outside the classroom, but not as agents of the government inside it.
See how articulation works? It involves specifics that clearly identify a position. You seem to embrace bumper sticker slogans over being able to articulate an actual position.
As long as he doesn’t moderate content, that’s all that matters. Not sure how many people are involved with substack, but as long as they keep it an open forum of varying ideas, politics and beliefs it works.
Liberals have not "inverted history". By combining government and private industry into a nexus of state power, they have intentionally become the definition of fascism.
Exactly, and they have done it through bastardizing words in the process to make it seem 'good' and 'natural'. The worship of the state above all else, a desire for war as the first option, censorship and ruining political opponents...well, that is fascism.
Thank you for taking this on Glenn. Hate speech is just a buzzword for offensive or unpopular speech. It is frightening how this insidious 'invention' of snowflakes is encroaching here in the US. In Europe there are laws passed banning 'hate speech', yet at least we have the First Amendment. It allows people to deny the holocaust...and it allows people like me to mock and ridicule them for their idiocy. Such is freedom....and it's sad that so many want to limit freedom because something may hurt someone's feelings.
Lastly, Jeff Jarvis, through the views expressed on his tweet, has more in common with Jeff Davis than any do-gooder out there.
So; the billionaire classes take away free speech and give us more mind control and censorship and now, the remedy is a white knight billionaire giving back our free speech and reducing censorship. This truly is the amerikan Way. The people can never organize and take power; it has to be a hero, a super hero. How long have amerikans been conditioned to look to hero to save them? As long as I've been alive and that's a long time and, of course, it used to be god and for some it still is. Sorry folks, god ain't gonna save you and neither is any hero..ya gotta organize!
God helps those who help themselves. And you are right, there are no heroes waiting to save people, people themselves have to become the heroes they desire.
Good to see Greenwald wading into the "grooming" issue. He has expressed a certain kind of hedged semi-admiration for Chris Rufo and this is one of the things I would like to see more clarity on.
(Greenwald's tweet was "Love him, hate him, whatever: there's no denying @realchrisrufo has had a very significant impact on GOP and therefore American politics in a remarkably short amount of time. Rare to see a new activist campaign, spearheaded largely by one person, come to fruition so quickly." -- https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1455696201932808195 )
I think Dick Cheney is very smart and was very influential. I supposed you can classify that as a certain kind of "admiration" but, needless to say, that doesn't remotely imply agreement with the agenda he used those skills to advance.
Good point in that people still have positive attributes even if they espouse views you don’t. Sometimes hard to see in the storm of political disagreement.
Good to see the reply. I don't see your tweet as full-fledged admiration and I was careful to make that clear in multiple ways. And I know you wouldn't use Chris Rufo's tactics yourself, even apart from your disagreeing with his agenda. Still, I don't think you would have spoken of Dick Cheney or Hillary Clinton in the way you spoke of Rufo there. So, I believe my comment was fair.
To think, I once thought highly of Dick Cheney. It's probably because of his intellect and wit. Nonetheless, as I have discovered later than many others, the man is a snake. However, just as with all amoral power hungry men and women, he isn't stupid and that's the frightening thing.
Wanted to come back to the "grooming" issue now that Greenwald has held the Callin show he promised. Too much of his Callin discussion is closely molded to what's beneficial for Greenwald himself: (1) he says that kids should be taught and shown at a young age that it's fine for a child to have same-sex parents (which helps Greenwald and his family); (2) he suggests that on most or all other topics the parents should have the "role" of deciding what values the kids are taught (which is also helpful for Greenwald); (3) he says that a person's being gay isn't due to poor influence in their childhood from adults, but he's suggested that maybe being trans or having other less familiar gender/sexual identities may be affected by possibly questionable encouragement from adults or society (so he may be more willing to defend his own gender/sexual identity than others'). When I see his positions so closely matched to what benefits him, I begin to doubt whether his views on these topics really deserve our acceptance or can claim to have any objective correctness. Usually I admire Greenwald because he follows principles which diverge more from what benefits him.
I think Greenwald is correct that people have an important right to some autonomy in their parenting of their children. The drive to protect parenting autonomy can be emotionally strong and can have some political power, mainly in conservative politics but not only there -- just as the drive to protect reproductive autonomy can be emotionally strong and have some political power, mainly in progressive politics but not only there. And it's easy to see parallels between parenting autonomy as a political force and reproductive autonomy as a political force -- they both feel like a last bastion of someone's interpersonal ability to do something creatively powerful and valuably intimate in a hostile world. Both kinds of autonomy are threatened by critics who say that maybe the children or potential offspring have their own important interests that may not be perfectly aligned with the parents'. But I think both kinds of autonomy deserve some respect.
Still, when people embrace the stricter forms of parental autonomy as if parents should be able to largely control what values their kids are exposed to, it often becomes a bit delusional (since parents can't really expect to have that much control) and can sometimes be unhelpful (since even if the parent's goals are good, the parent's means of trying to achieve these goals may not work well enough to justify excluding the influence of other people's values). It's not at all rare for kids to benefit by being taught about values that their parents dislike, even if the parents are the last to accept it. Whether a strong form of parental autonomy is good for kids is at best a case-by-case issue. And the parents are not the only people in society who can claim to have the role of deciding what values should be taught to kids, since schools are also an institution designed to do that (though schools, too, have their flaws in this).
Greenwald says that his becoming a parent has made him much more sympathetic to parental autonomy. Still, once the sort of politics that emphasizes a strong form of parental autonomy really gets going, it's not going to be at all harmonious with Greenwald's views on LGBT issues in education. So when he comes close to embracing the idea that parents should pretty much have control over what values their children are exposed to in school (at least he kind of suggests this where young children are concerned), it feels like it's sidetracking his case.
But his main point on the "grooming" issue isn't about whether or not he takes parents' side. He is trying to speak against those who lie to parents: those who create and stoke a panic by falsely presenting LGBT discussion in schools as "grooming". Unusually, Greenwald isn't very forthright in calling these people who deceive parents liars, and he doesn't clearly separate their deceptive goals from parents' interests (or children's interests). As a reader of Greenwald, I'm used to seeing him hurl repeated charges of "lying", sometimes too hastily, but when it comes to those who invented the "grooming" panic, he holds back. His language is much more circuitous and hesitant: the harshest he gets is "it seems like a very dishonest and dangerous way of trying to conduct what ought to be a nuanced and sensitive and careful debate about what children should and shouldn't be taught in schools". I appreciate the need for nuance, but I don't understand why he doesn't point out the lie more. Whether teaching LGBT-friendly values in schools is something you agree with 100% or 60% or 0%, the current campaign against it is indoctrinating people with a grotesque lie to serve the broader purposes of a political faction.
The sooner we start referring to the people that oppose free speech as “Democrats” and not refer to them as “liberals”, the sooner we can get back to actual liberalism. I spent my youth trying desperately to get out of an evangelical south laden with restrictions only to look up at my beloved New York City two decades on as it now houses the things I tried so desperately to escape.
They have taken the name and bastardized it. Same thing with 'Progressive' as the policies advocated by 'progressives' are largely regressive. It will take a long time to reclaim a word, in large part due to the widespread negative connotation it now carries.
The CCP redefined the word “progress” to mean “our way”. By definition, whatever the CCP espouses is “progress”. Our left hitchhiked onto the same definition from lots of sources.
They are progressive like cancer.
Couldn't agree more.
they are "the left." It is more than just democrats.
They are about as left-wing as Greenwald, Rogan, and Bernie Bros. are right-wing…which I would argue is somewhere between “zero and no-chance” in my opinion.
Democrats are becoming more authoritarian in their attempts to squash any dissent. I recognize the behavior as I was steeped in it growing up a military brat in the Deep South where conformity of thought and action was not only encouraged, but rewarded.
The left as a party exists to implement the state.
Their entire platform is based around it. If their entire constituency were to somehow climb out of poverty (even assuming the unlikelihood of this), they would then no longer need the state, or the DNC, and thus, you see why they never actually want to fix anything.
Racism? Thats the same song they have been playing in DNC controlled cities since 1968. Perhaps people forgot Chicago.
Rigging elections? Thats the same song they have been singing since Hinky Dink Kenna in the 1900's. Dominick Demuro is evidence it still goes on today. Perhaps people forget Truman defeating Dewey was long before the Chicago mob won it for JFK.
Welfare states? Again, the same song they have been playing since the original New Deal. Why aren't more people climbing out of poverty in DNC controlled cities? Can anyone really tell me West Baltimore isnt a drug infested slum like it has been since Pelosi's dad was mayor there?
The DNC is all talk, all bullshit, and this is why they HAVE to own the media. Without control of the media the DNC would literally not exist. Their coalition would crumble when their jewish constituency finds out that Obama is taking secret pictures with Louis Farrakhan, a hate criminal. Their coalition would crumble when their pro-women constituency finds out that Bill Clinton and Epstein are pals and Epstein and Ghislaine were in the WH when Bill was President.
Its all a mirage and the entire thing is predicated on the stupidity of the masses which is again why education is something they cannot get success on despite the US spending more than any country on earth on it.
Again, all talk, all "the state", and all DNC
What is weird is that all the electric autos in Calif. will need vast electric generating plants to supply the mega voltage to run these vehicles. Guess what that electric will be generated in other States and their citizens will have to bear the brunt of any pollution from those electric plants. IF States get into conflicts with places like Calif and cut off their electric I guess no one will be able to drive their cars. Mandating the conversion to electric really violates the idea that organic change is best and trial and error should be considered BEFORE rushing into some untried technology. Unintended consequences are usually fixable but when the entire state is run with electric autos, buses and trucks those consequences might be life threatening and economically disastrous. But lets keep allowing the incompetent government to dictate how everything is done and we will be as efficient as the Soviet Union with its' 5 year plans in the 1930's. Starvation, industrial stagnation, and a pretty misery laden life for its citizens. Gov. Newsom cannot even change a flat tire and he suddenly is an expert on the transportation needs of 20 million people. Typical government think by hubris ridden know nothings. Same bureaucrats Solzhenitsyn described in his book "Cancer Ward." Now they are appearing in every nook and cranny of American society. Best to vote these Communist lite politicians out asap.
The conversion is intended to eliminate competition from other energy sources… everything they say about climate, the environment and nuclear power is just patter to distract the marks (the state’s residents and businesses). Once there is only one source of baseline power and only one legal way to generate it, insiders will control whose fossil fuels are sold to electric utilities and at what price. This is the kind of thing (magnified a thousand-fold) that goes on is China under Chairman Xi, the head of the most prosperous crime family in China. In California, Jerry Brown’s family natural gas holdings stand to make them billions of dollars from no-bid contracts.
With most political decisions here is always a curtain to be pulled back. Nothing is decided in a vacuum and the bottom line is always the controlling factor. Jerry Brown and the Newsom's are kissing financial cousins along with the Getty family. All politics in Calif revolves around that troika of power brokers.
The Rockefeller family and others learned decades ago that getting family members elected to office just eliminated the middleman and allowed direct access to the U.S. Treasury and the policies that bedeviled business tycoons in the past. Trump was never an inner circle accepted billionaire within NYC society so his election alarmed the in crowd to the extent that all knives were out and the surrogates in government acted to upset his applecart. Had he been "one of them" all would have been A-okay and it would have been business as usual. Not a big Trumper but he generated a boatload of hostility for a guy who was not a Communist or a Nazi. His policies were pretty innocuous given the mass hysteria on the left. Mean tweets and a nasty attitude is nothing compared to the war mongering and corporate grifting that is the usual way of life in the D.C. swamp. Trump was responsible for NO American children getting killed or maimed in bogus "wag the dog" wars. He got peace agreements where progressives could get nothing but empty air. Yet he was castigated by the in crowd and their very vocal minions in the media. Seemed like manufactured outrage predicated on something other that his personality or perceived POV.
In ny hochul is looking to ban all gas appliances for electric , where the electricity will come from who knows?
Nice way of neatly disposing of half of the electorate as evil people.
There are of course plenty of Democrats who don’t agree with what certain liberals are doing in terms of deplatforming and canceling people. The problem is that they don’t agree with your side that calling anyone who opposes them “traitors to the Constitution” is necessarily a better tactic, at least not in terms of eventual outcomes for the country.
Well then I'd believe you if any actually spoke out against
Actually, there are plenty of people speaking out against them, it’s not as rare as you seem to think.
Gotta put Joe Biden right up there "Speaking out", since everything he's said or done "proves Wrong".
Other that his ethical problems Old Joe is a low rent, serial liar with a pretty limited I.Q. A typical Peter Principal political who is in way over his head.
Problem is as POTUS he can do real damage with his casual ignorance and bumbling thought processes. This guy was the "joke of Congress" before Obama legitimized him in the eyes of many.
IF the election was rigged by Democrats and leftists they should be ferreted out and prosecuted. If not, somehow this election mimicked and appeared to be a rigged one that was covered up by the media and the Court system. Either way a disservice was done that should be exposed and its enablers identified and/or prosecuted.
You also have Weiss, Unger-Sargon and McWhorter who denounce wokeism.
Nah, there are definitely more. I’ve engaged on more than a few comment threads and Bill Maher’s was never one of them even once. I don’t believe he writes a blog, or am I wrong?
Would you be happier if I called those that oppose free speech a “basket of deplorables….irredeemable, etc.?” We are now playing by the rules that Democrats have made using their media lackeys.
Democrats are well aware that outsourcing censorship to private corporations like Twitter provides them cover because they then don’t have to actively use government power to censor, but the willingness to forego free speech by private means is a clear indicator of what they would do if they were able to get rid of the First Amendment.
If the GOP doesn’t want to be associated with the KKK they should denounce them at every turn. Same goes for Democrats and those among them that despise dissent.
Give me a break, there’s a huge gap between calling someone “deplorable” and calling them a “traitor” or suggesting, ever more overtly as time goes on, that they should be killed because they’re “not real Americans” or something else along those lines.
The left has gone off the rails with its canceling and deplatforming, I agree. But the right, while lauding free speech, uses it the same way that irresponsible leaders in the past often have, to whip up hatred and propel the country toward violent conflict. Please don’t try to convince me that lumping all ordinary Democrats together as “evil” or “destroyers” or “communists” or “traitors” or “not real Americans” is a strategy somehow specifically designed by the right to improve dialogue and enhance the functioning of government in this country.
I didn’t and still don’t think that Hillary lost because of Russia; I was called a “traitor” or a “Putin puppet” on numerous occasions by card-carrying members of the Democratic Party here in New York City by the self-deputized “elites” as a result. I am not calling Twitter a bunch of traitors, but I will call their executives a bunch of cowards for fearing what information or difference of opinion will do to our electorate.
SEE: Hunter Biden lap top.
Democrats are suffering from a classic case of projection. Calling for the investiagation / arrest of Tulsi Gabbard and Tucker Carlson while complaining about Putin behaving the same would make for great satire if it weren’t so scary.
Absolutely agree the left has quite a bit of cleanup to do when it comes to that laptop as well as Russiagate. And a fair amount of cleanup when it comes to pushing masks and lockdowns well beyond their limits of actual utility.
But I sense that the right has some cleanup to do when it comes to who won the 2020 election and what the significance of that J6 episode was. And maybe apologize for being completely wrong about the ultimate scope of the pandemic and the utility / safety of vaccines. Please don’t jump to the unwarranted conclusion from that last sentence that I support vaccine mandates, btw.
I’m fed up with both sides. At least I won’t have to vote in the next election, that’s 30 minutes of my life I can spend doing something more pleasurable and useful.
Revolver News has some interesting video from Jan 6th. Ray Epps has never been charged with a crime even though he was seen on video encouraging people to go into the Capitol.
https://www.revolver.news/2021/10/meet-ray-epps-the-fed-protected-provocateur-who-appears-to-have-led-the-very-first-1-6-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol/
https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/
As to the 2020 election there is more evidence coming out every day about fraud, widespread fraud. Zuckerberg's $400,000,000 bought a lot of poll workers.
Now I see we share many interests, Mike, and I'll bet after 10 or 15 minutes we will be sharing an ice cold 🍻
We agree, not all Democrats agree with the far left-wing of their own Party. Trouble is the media either calls out moderates, Joe Manchin as one example, as not 'team players', or they're completely ignored for not seeking media attention. I can't name any moderates in either major Party precisely because media doesn't seek their opinions - they only want conflict as they believe it benefits them (the media) despite the ongoing decline in readership, viewership, and listeners. Legacy media simply doesn't care anymore about increasing the number of people consuming their product - yet get incensed by sites like Substack. While the two-Party system is clearly broken in the USA, it's the media that's preventing any kind of reconciliation of common ideas and what could be agreed upon between them.
Well, I think there could be some truth to that, but I think it’s primarily the fault of the extreme voices themselves. As you said, many of them gain money from this sort of activity and many of them also seem to like the attention.
There’s also a self-isolating process going on here, I think. As someone who doesn’t fit neatly into either the left or the right, it’s increasingly apparent to me that I’d be best off never opining on anything or talking to anyone about my views. If I tell a leftist that I’m fed up with the transgender campaigning or ideas like reparations or defunding the police, I’m told in short order that I’m homophobic and a racist. On the other hand, if I turn around and tell a conservative “Wait a minute, I happen to think we should do SOMEthing about climate change and don’t necessarily think Obamacare is entirely bad!”, I’m immediately ripped into as a communist who wants to confiscate everyone’s private property and turn the country into a gulag.
I think this is a large part of the reason why very, very many ordinary Americans try to avoid political debates completely.
"...I’d be best off never opining on anything or talking to anyone about my views." Interesting. Who on the right wants to censor or silence your opinions and viewpoint? I would agree that many on 'the left' don't want to hear a pro-Republican perspective and are actively seeking to prevent those speakers to have a forum on Facebook, Twitter and similar, corporately-moderated platforms. Have you been banned from any 'right' platforms for sharing your left-of-center thoughts on say, Palar? I have only one social media account I now rarely participate in - and now Substack - so I might be way off base in saying the right may completely disagree with some of your positions, but of those I am aware, none will try to, what the kids call, 'cancel' you.
"Who on the right wants to censor or silence your opinions and viewpoint?"
The vast majority of religious people.
This is 100% correct and is the bane of true conservatism imo. The intolerance of the religious right and how it corrupted the right.
Well, perhaps you have a thicker skin than I do but I don’t care to continue engaging with people who tell me repeatedly that I’m an evil person who should somehow be physically liquidated because I don’t agree with them on something. I honestly don’t think I’m exaggerating when I say that this has happened to me hundreds of times over the past three or four years.
It’s not just because it’s unpleasant, but also because it’s unproductive.
So I self-censor. I used to comment several times per day, now I comment perhaps once a week in a few select places and I find myself doing even that more and more sporadically as time goes on.
In other words, all this “free speech” doesn’t seem to be leading anywhere good. Moderate-minded people are increasingly turning away and the only people left standing are the extremists screaming at each other. Politicians let themselves be pulled along by the extremists because those are pretty much the only voices the politicians and their moneylenders and campaign managers hear and feel they need to pay attention to.
I guess my viewpoint is that what the left is doing is wrong - we should defend free speech absolutely. But at the same time I think the right is deceiving itself when it jauntily proclaims that free speech will ultimately lead to the downfall of powerful elites and reform of our political culture. On the contrary, I think the kind of free speech we currently have is instead emblematic of the terminal sickness of our political and social culture and a foretaste of the national breakdown, quite possibly violent, that’s coming sometime in the not-too-distant future.
Fair enough. Good chat.
Here's a history you seem to know nothing about:
http://thetroypress.com/articles/tiger/20160908/tiger.20160908.html
The article is called "The Story of Us." It's the story of left commenters who were driven out from what YOU think are left sites - they're NOTHING like "left," but if all you know is that if it's not your version of right, it must be left, well, you'll see it all as "left," even though ... well, I might be wasting my keystrokes on that...
VERY unfortunately, a liar among "the group who managed to survive" sowed lies and dissent and managed to break even this stalwart group up, but that's a longer, sadder tale to tell...
what I'm saying is that the GENUINE left experienced this kind of behavior LONG before you on the right did. The culprits are the Neo-Liberals and they are NOT left.
"Have you been banned from any 'right' platforms for sharing your left-of-center thoughts"
Yes.
Oh? Which?
Fair point as, based on caucus membership in Congress, half of the democrats are in crazyville (CPC and Democratic Socialists) while the other half are not. Combine that with the percentage of the population which believes in more than two genders, 18%, and you have 35-50% of the Democrats as crazed, while 50-65% are not.
There’s similar percentages of craziness about other things on the right, overall I’d say a good third of the entire population is crazy to some degree. As a physician I often have to tread rather carefully when patients start to talk politics extemporaneously in the exam room. What they say is often very entertaining, however.
True, and sadly a lot of it comes from Libertarians, whether Ventura or McAfee , they can be....well, out there.
Great point , there are plenty of democrats who are not on board with extremist agendas. I have a feeling many of them will be sitting 2022 out.
As an old conservative, Rob, I hope non-extremist Democrats will vote in the mid-term election. Our right to vote is a precious gift for all U.S. citizens.
I want them to speak up
I think some of them are, look at Substack. Heck ruy texrria , the father of the coalition of the ascendant theory that dominated democrat group think has been hitting the panic button about the behavior of the democrats.
I appreciate you took time for me. I will hold on to some hope
Don’t agree with you that it’s 99% of people on the left who feel that way. Certainly not my personal experience.
I prefer to call them Progressives using fascist tactics while wearing the highly ironic AntiFa uniform.
The mistake there is that there are still a goodly handful of DEMOCRATS who are NOT a part of this, such as Tulsi Gabbard'; GLENN GOT IT RIGHT.
True. And there are plenty of Republicans who ARE a part of this.
Sadly true on both counts, not enough Gabbards and far too many RINO swamp rats.
Liberalism is dead. It was replaced by "Progressiveism" which is also rather a joke because they look a LOT like the Falwell right from the 80's that were the exact opposite of Progressive.
I agree except I would change democrats to most establishment political figures regardless of party
You and I seem to have had the same experience, Elmer.
Thank you for your comment.
I had an aunt who nearly broke my arm leading me up church steps. Then her kids made an unannounced visit to me in another city and harangued me for two hours to accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior. I thought they would never leave. I like attending Catholic Mass sometimes. Why be rigid?
Your right , this is a choice you should make without pressure. I believe your aunt and kids living a good life and being there for you when needed would be a far stronger argument for religion then being berated.
Agreed. The term Liberal must never be applied to today's woke left.
A few suggestions:
Woke Marxist ¹
Woke communist (Equity)
Woke Fascist (see Antifa)
Given CRT race essentialism maybe
Woke Nazis
White privilege,
Whiteness
Are Constructs that blame one ethnicity for all problems of the others reminds of Hitler's views of the Jew being responsible for keeping the chosen from their rightful place
¹ accurate since group identity politics is the extension of Marxism beyond the class struggle paradigm to the struggle of various Oppressor vs Oppressed Groups in the West. Designed to Foment conflict for revolution to Subvert prosperous Western society.
I came here to say exactly this! Or perhaps we refer to them as the ’Facist’ wing of the Democratic Party”.
LOL! The GOP legislates infringements to free speech, as Florida's GOP did in their "Don't say gay" law that makes it illegal to discuss gender dysphoria and orientation issues in an age appropriate way, and it's the Democrats that are the problem! Right! This attitude is just bullshit. There is a problem with woke liberalism, but it is not the Democratic Party who has not legislated any such thing.
I created my screen-name back when George W Bush said he was a "Compassionate Conservative." But lately the L word supposedly covers Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and many other illiberal, right-wing Democrats.
I’ve got the popcorn out and a cold Mich Ultra to enjoy the Twitter v Musk showdown. I do wish their was more publication of the toddler themed meltdowns by the employees. Spring break is coming at a great time!!!
Considering many Twitter employees spent the last year writing algorithms with the goal of trying to bankrupt my family, and exclude us from society, for refusing an experimental medical treatment we don’t need that doesn’t work, I only feel so bad watching the tables flipped as a resume that includes Twitter quickly become a black ball. The potential outcomes of the offer by Musk certainly point towards some version of Musk wins or Twitter loses. 🍻
if he buys, the triggered snowflakes leave; if he sells, the share price collapses;
either way it's a win.
Bingo. It’s not a good investment at $50billion plus for other entities. It was worth $30billion, and falling, without Musk. Even if Gates or some other billionaire woketard makes an offer, Twitter’s reputation is toast, and it would be marvelous to watch Gates blow over $50 billion in an already dying company which would be accelerated by his purchase.
If the board rejects the offer, the institutional groups better get their checkbooks ready because they are the deep pockets to sue. One of the largest shareholder class action lawsuits awaits Twitter, the board, Blackrock, State Street, Vanguard if it goes that way - ar least for a company with such little market capitalization. The securities lawyers must be salivating.
This is also why people should hire brokers/ advisors that directly invest the money into individual stocks and bonds as opposed to dumping it all in mutual funds or even the ETF’s that are basically tax advantages mutual funds these days. Control of our own wealth with as few intermediaries as possible is key.
Brilliant. Finally, the arrogant thought police at twitter will see their power broken...and have no way to stop it from happening.
good point, Anna!
exactly.
Yes the stock will take a hit but some other set of billion dollar capital will buy it simply for its political use and influence with Washington.
Yes.
But I don't care.
Elon kick them in the balls that they don't have.
All they have is censorship.
Fear is interesting...
I think Social Media only survives with a subscription model where you have to pay to play.
The thing that makes Twitter to toxic is not Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, the Babylon Bee or the Republican National Committee.
It's that you can sign up without any serious attempt by Twitter to verify your identity. Why would they when their advertising revenue model is predicated on # of accounts?
And any subtweet is hardly worth consuming unless you head to Twitchy where they aggregate the best of the subtweets....then mock the original tweet.
Hard to believe that saying there are 2 sexes would get you banned, or suggesting that Joe Biden profited handsomely off his son's hoovering up corrupt cash all over the corrupt world.
With CCPA, GDPR , Do Not Sell My Data and other emerging privacy safeguards (cookie deprecation; app opt in for tracking by Apple)...what you are seeing at Substack and other media organizations (paywalls) will continue, which is dangerous since Twitter right now is the newspaper editor for most major daily newspapers. When you only write content for a paying audience, you have to tailor that content to your paying audience...which is how newspapers get far away from their 4th estate roots and end up being as woke as the Democrat Party.
Twitter, FB and Google's (and Microsoft and Apple) biggest sin is stealing news story content created by local media stations and monetizing it themselves without paying the local paper for the overhead, salaries and other costs involved wiht creating content.
It's like the sucker fish on the side of a shark....eating off little larvae until they can work their way into the shark where they then begin to eat out their heart and lungs.
Sorry...I know it's still breakfast time for some of you, but it's also important we call a spade a spade when a spade is in front of us.
I just hope the whole platform implodes and Fascibook follows in it's footsteps. Google is too well connected to government I think to be shut down now.
The left controls the mainstream media (aside from Fox), all the main newspapers (except for WSJ), Hollywood, K-12 education, social media moderators, Madison Avenue, academia, and corporate HR and PR departments.
And they still think they are the plucky oppressed rebel outcasts who are in danger of being silenced because Elon Musk might trim their ability to censor Wrongthink.
The left has zero, absolutely zero concept of its own hegemony.
Wait, you're telling me that the movement that has the fervent backing of the media, big tech, giant corporations, and the democratic party aren't REALLY #TheResistance?
They are the 'Resistance' to democracy. It's all projection. They claim to support democracy yet do all they can to subvert it.
"Democracy Dies In The Absence of 100% Democratic Party Control Of Government."
Democracy, for them, means the correct people voting the correct way.
They took the term and bastardized it, just as they did with 'Liberal' and 'Progressive'. For the DNC, those three words, democracy, liberal and progressive, mean the exact opposite of their true definitions.
Freedom is slavery!
War is peace!
We have always been at war with Eastasia!
In Soviet Russia....err I mean in modern America....
an army of outre NPCs.
They are not the real left. Opportunistic scum they are.
"Private companies can do whatever they want! Wait, not like that!!!!"
Further proof, if any were needed, that reliance upon overt censorship is a sure sign of weakness and not strength.
The worst part of this is watching dipshit hacks like Robert Reich and Max Boot claim that allowing a libertarian view free speech is what dictators do.
Yes, Virgina. Hitler, Stalin and Mao were real limited government, free-market, free speech sort of dudes.
Which is why I call the first individual you name "Robert Reich III". I know that's now how he pronounces his name, yet he has the same Nazi/Soviet show trial views and the same authoritarian ones as well.
Reading the tweet from this Jarvis asshat, you'd think that the Nazis were about to take over and free speech might break out at any minute.
Somebody should ask how he knows what it felt like in interwar Berlin. I have a great sense that he has no fucking clue. He probably thinks that Liza Minelli and Joel Grey were *literally* there.
Twitter is real life tho
Impossible to be called real life when only a fraction of it, the insane liberal approved version of it, is shown.
That's a bingo.
Thanks for also looking at 'grooming' Glenn. Why anyone should be teaching sex ed to kids is beyond me. I honestly don't think the Florida law goes far enough, that it should extend up to the age of consent, 16. Many children have issues going through puberty about their sexual identities. I for one in my mid teens thought I may be better off female than male, however that was puberty hitting me. With the woke nuts out there now, they would have forced me into some maniacal surgery and destroyed my life because they cannot comprehend that they do not know what is best for people.
Glenn you have my vote for board membership.
I'm really curious to see how this WAR between Elon Musk and the Fascist/Communist tyrants of Twitter plays out.
And, if Elon Musk wins, I want to see if he will uphold Free Speech on Twitter, and restores the millions of Twitter accounts that those Fascist tyrants have DELETED, suppressed, suspended.
Edit to add: Elon Musk succeeded in taking over PayPal first, and then Tesla Motors. He is using exactly the same strategy to try and take over Twitter.
Contrary to what most people believe, Elon Musk was not the founder of PayPal, nor the founder of Tesla Motors. He took them over, and later claimed to be the founder of both. The Tyrants of Twitter will have a hard nut to crack, with Musk.
I wonder how many employees would quit and who would remove all those pesky anti-free speech algorithms?
Maybe they can get useful jobs, like cleaning up trash and excrement in cities like New York, Seattle and San Fran.
That's an excellent idea, Stephen!
We can see from this that you're head is in the shitter.
I'm sure Elon will find someone. Fixing Twitter algorithms is not exactly rocket science.
It's trivial actually; no algorithm's needed. TA DA!
good question, Martha! I'm sure those deranged Twitter employees are in Full Panic mode... I bet Elon Musk has a Team ready to completely replace the current management.
About the censorship algorithms: it is not a difficult job to remove them: 3 skilled developers can do it in a week (or less)
Or my granddaughter can do it with an executable that starts from scratch.
Perfect! send your granddaughter resume to Elon!
Sad when an eight year old can figure it out. But funny too!
at 8 years old? she's a Genius!
If 1000 incompetent devrlopers have implemented the algorithms and then created dependencies to those algorithms all over the Twitter stack, which in all probability is correct, those 3 skilled developers will need at least a couple of months to entangle the mess.
I suspect that, were Musk to buy 100% ownership of Twitter, he would quickly be "brought around".
yes, that is a possibility. All we can do is wait and see what unfolds...
However, Elon Musk succeeded in taking over PayPal first, and then Tesla Motors. He is using exactly the same strategy to try and take over Twitter.
(Note: Elon Musk was not the founder of PayPal, nor the founder of Tesla Motors. He took them over, and later claimed to be the founder of both).
> ...later claimed to be the founder of both
that famous humility of his appearing again...
Including the accounts of the real left.
yes. We need Free Speech for every voice.
The lab leak theory was banned from discussion at both facebook and Twitter.
Lies, lies all lies.
Disinformation.
Or was it misinformation? It's so hard to decide.
Now talk of the lab leak theory is allowed at both Facebook and Twitter.
Discuss.
And the policy was changed on both places THE EXACT DAY that Biden said the lab leak was possible.
If you think FB/Twitter is a private company, you're not paying attention. They're getting marching orders from the government -- a complete violation of the First Amendment.
There is quid pro quo. Government is getting something from them too. Like unobstructed access to gobs of data, ala NSA/ATT link.
Your likely right, personally I believe the Obama campaign and the democrat party were getting raw voter id data from the tech companies to aid in election strategies and targeting voters.
They are definitely in bed with the Biden White House. Psaki has more than once called these tech oligarchs out anytime the slightest bit of information that this administration doesn’t approve of gets out.
Remember when Facebook banned the Gold Star mother who verbally attacked Biden?
100% political.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2021/09/01/facebook-explains-why-they-banned-gold-star-mother-after-posting-criticisms-of-joe-biden-n2595130
I don't agree with your claim about government control of either site. Their bias is already baked into the cake, and has been for years.
They don't need Joe Biden to force them to be a bunch of hacks, they just are.
Then you're not paying attention.
https://nypost.com/2021/07/15/white-house-flagging-posts-for-facebook-to-censor-due-to-covid-19-misinformation/
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday the Biden administration is identifying “problematic” posts for Facebook to censor because they contain “misinformation” about COVID-19.
Psaki disclosed the government’s role in policing social media during her daily press briefing after Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called on companies to purge more pandemic posts.
The demand for censorship — and Psaki’s admission of government involvement — follows a series of flip-flops from health officials who contradicted themselves throughout the pandemic on issues such as mask efficacy, as well as censorship of claims that later gained credibility, such as the theory that COVID-19 leaked from a Chinese lab.
Nothing the government did was an order. They weren't going to be prosecuted if they refused.
They did what they did because they're a bunch of disingenuous hacks.
It's what hacks do.
Yes, it's a suggestion. Like when the mafia "suggests" that you pay your protection money so that nothing happens to your cute little restaurant.
Especially when you consider the backdrop of these exact people threatening to break up social media companies if they don't do more to censor.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/10/28/twitter-facebook-google-senate-hearing-live-updates/
Not sure what the practical difference is between an "order" and an "offer you can't refuse ".
lol great minds think alike :)
They can refuse, but they don't want to.
That's the point.
They're hacks who are in lockstep with the left. They're happy to do whatever it takes to please the left, not because they're afraid of the left, but because they are the left.
Do you really think twitter has to be coerced by the Biden administration to do things favorable to Biden?
Please say it ain't so.
Real nice website you got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it.
I don't think they are under the command or they fully agree with the security state. But the tech companies have a mutually beneficial relationship with the feds, they know what their partners want and need.
Actually the lab leak dam broke somewhat after the Nicholas Wade Medium article. Soon after 'the scientists' published in PLOS their concerns, including Baric which opened the door to allow discussion. I often think the eZine Medium is used to signal the liberals what their masters ordain. Watching it unfold was remarkable. The Wade piece was quite cleverly constructed to a this/then that dance but the conclusion was obvious.
Elon Musk becoming an icon of "free speech"? Oh, the irony...it burns.
That shows profound ignorance of who Elon is.
Once he is in control, Twitter's main objective will be to coup whoever Musk feels like.
How good should we all feel about delivering private control of twitter speech to any one person, even the formidable Musk, also presumed the wealthiest person on earth. Perhaps Ayn Rand would approve.
In theory I agree it should be a common carrier or stripped of 230 protections because editorial decisions via policies and algorithms are still editorial decisions. Here in the real world where no political effort is being made to do that, and as the Democrat party in power pushes for outright Democrat control of speech, I find this an entertaining and wonderful development. It might be the push necessary to clarify 230 into doing what it was intended to do.
Yesss. Great fun now. Unintended consequences later. The story of civilization. But in view of the amazing fact that we haven't blown ourselves up yet, I too am hopeful...
Dang. I thought I was an optimist because I expect us to blow ourselves up any day now ...
From a purely selfish point of view, being 75, it's kind of a moot point for me, but not for my genes, which is the reality, for better or worse, of our 'natural state,' with the ironic twist that the headlong chaos of human culture, not genetics, is now in 'control' of the planet.
Your first sentence deserves praise; the rest is tribalism. You should let all that other shit go. WHY? Because if you want to achieve the goal of your first sentence being applied all that other shit has to go...
I disagree. Being realistic is not “tribalism.” The reality is no one we elect is doing anything about the suppression of free speech, which makes enforcement of 230 neutrality a theory or ideological goal that isn’t realistic at the moment. Acknowledging it is Democrats who want to control speech is not tribalistic, it is acknowledgement of objective reality. I’ll take progress over these endless waits for ideal everyday. Incremental progress is still progress. Waiting for perfect is a pipe dream. Denying reality is as ridiculous as claiming men can give birth.
Actually, the real _reality_ is that there are "those on the right" who also want to suppress free speech, just for different topics. My guess is that you are either ignorant of their desires or agree with them... I can't know.
You provide zero examples of those on the right suppressing speech. I can’t know what you think you are talking about unless you can articulate it specifically. Reality is easy to articulate, so why can’t you do it?
Am I opposed to child sexualization and race baiting aimed towards captive minors with no choice or agency in government funded schools? Absolutely!!! Forcing someone to listen against their will has absolutely nothing to do with the rights of speech. Moreover, my opposition tax dollars being spent on sexualizing children and outright groomer indoctrination is not “suppressing” speech. Nowhere in the constitution is government speech protected. Public school teachers are speaking on behalf of the government that funds them. Those teachers can say whatever they want outside the classroom, but not as agents of the government inside it.
See how articulation works? It involves specifics that clearly identify a position. You seem to embrace bumper sticker slogans over being able to articulate an actual position.
How good should we feel about taking the control out of the hands of the government and their Twitter puppets? Very good.
Indeed. For the moment.
Not really. The Common Carrier issue is paramount here, NOT who controls any particular company.
As long as he doesn’t moderate content, that’s all that matters. Not sure how many people are involved with substack, but as long as they keep it an open forum of varying ideas, politics and beliefs it works.
Liberals have not "inverted history". By combining government and private industry into a nexus of state power, they have intentionally become the definition of fascism.
Exactly, and they have done it through bastardizing words in the process to make it seem 'good' and 'natural'. The worship of the state above all else, a desire for war as the first option, censorship and ruining political opponents...well, that is fascism.
they have memory holed history
Thank you for taking this on Glenn. Hate speech is just a buzzword for offensive or unpopular speech. It is frightening how this insidious 'invention' of snowflakes is encroaching here in the US. In Europe there are laws passed banning 'hate speech', yet at least we have the First Amendment. It allows people to deny the holocaust...and it allows people like me to mock and ridicule them for their idiocy. Such is freedom....and it's sad that so many want to limit freedom because something may hurt someone's feelings.
Lastly, Jeff Jarvis, through the views expressed on his tweet, has more in common with Jeff Davis than any do-gooder out there.
So; the billionaire classes take away free speech and give us more mind control and censorship and now, the remedy is a white knight billionaire giving back our free speech and reducing censorship. This truly is the amerikan Way. The people can never organize and take power; it has to be a hero, a super hero. How long have amerikans been conditioned to look to hero to save them? As long as I've been alive and that's a long time and, of course, it used to be god and for some it still is. Sorry folks, god ain't gonna save you and neither is any hero..ya gotta organize!
God helps those who help themselves. And you are right, there are no heroes waiting to save people, people themselves have to become the heroes they desire.
Good to see Greenwald wading into the "grooming" issue. He has expressed a certain kind of hedged semi-admiration for Chris Rufo and this is one of the things I would like to see more clarity on.
(Greenwald's tweet was "Love him, hate him, whatever: there's no denying @realchrisrufo has had a very significant impact on GOP and therefore American politics in a remarkably short amount of time. Rare to see a new activist campaign, spearheaded largely by one person, come to fruition so quickly." -- https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1455696201932808195 )
I think Dick Cheney is very smart and was very influential. I supposed you can classify that as a certain kind of "admiration" but, needless to say, that doesn't remotely imply agreement with the agenda he used those skills to advance.
Good point in that people still have positive attributes even if they espouse views you don’t. Sometimes hard to see in the storm of political disagreement.
Good to see the reply. I don't see your tweet as full-fledged admiration and I was careful to make that clear in multiple ways. And I know you wouldn't use Chris Rufo's tactics yourself, even apart from your disagreeing with his agenda. Still, I don't think you would have spoken of Dick Cheney or Hillary Clinton in the way you spoke of Rufo there. So, I believe my comment was fair.
To think, I once thought highly of Dick Cheney. It's probably because of his intellect and wit. Nonetheless, as I have discovered later than many others, the man is a snake. However, just as with all amoral power hungry men and women, he isn't stupid and that's the frightening thing.
Wanted to come back to the "grooming" issue now that Greenwald has held the Callin show he promised. Too much of his Callin discussion is closely molded to what's beneficial for Greenwald himself: (1) he says that kids should be taught and shown at a young age that it's fine for a child to have same-sex parents (which helps Greenwald and his family); (2) he suggests that on most or all other topics the parents should have the "role" of deciding what values the kids are taught (which is also helpful for Greenwald); (3) he says that a person's being gay isn't due to poor influence in their childhood from adults, but he's suggested that maybe being trans or having other less familiar gender/sexual identities may be affected by possibly questionable encouragement from adults or society (so he may be more willing to defend his own gender/sexual identity than others'). When I see his positions so closely matched to what benefits him, I begin to doubt whether his views on these topics really deserve our acceptance or can claim to have any objective correctness. Usually I admire Greenwald because he follows principles which diverge more from what benefits him.
I think Greenwald is correct that people have an important right to some autonomy in their parenting of their children. The drive to protect parenting autonomy can be emotionally strong and can have some political power, mainly in conservative politics but not only there -- just as the drive to protect reproductive autonomy can be emotionally strong and have some political power, mainly in progressive politics but not only there. And it's easy to see parallels between parenting autonomy as a political force and reproductive autonomy as a political force -- they both feel like a last bastion of someone's interpersonal ability to do something creatively powerful and valuably intimate in a hostile world. Both kinds of autonomy are threatened by critics who say that maybe the children or potential offspring have their own important interests that may not be perfectly aligned with the parents'. But I think both kinds of autonomy deserve some respect.
Still, when people embrace the stricter forms of parental autonomy as if parents should be able to largely control what values their kids are exposed to, it often becomes a bit delusional (since parents can't really expect to have that much control) and can sometimes be unhelpful (since even if the parent's goals are good, the parent's means of trying to achieve these goals may not work well enough to justify excluding the influence of other people's values). It's not at all rare for kids to benefit by being taught about values that their parents dislike, even if the parents are the last to accept it. Whether a strong form of parental autonomy is good for kids is at best a case-by-case issue. And the parents are not the only people in society who can claim to have the role of deciding what values should be taught to kids, since schools are also an institution designed to do that (though schools, too, have their flaws in this).
Greenwald says that his becoming a parent has made him much more sympathetic to parental autonomy. Still, once the sort of politics that emphasizes a strong form of parental autonomy really gets going, it's not going to be at all harmonious with Greenwald's views on LGBT issues in education. So when he comes close to embracing the idea that parents should pretty much have control over what values their children are exposed to in school (at least he kind of suggests this where young children are concerned), it feels like it's sidetracking his case.
But his main point on the "grooming" issue isn't about whether or not he takes parents' side. He is trying to speak against those who lie to parents: those who create and stoke a panic by falsely presenting LGBT discussion in schools as "grooming". Unusually, Greenwald isn't very forthright in calling these people who deceive parents liars, and he doesn't clearly separate their deceptive goals from parents' interests (or children's interests). As a reader of Greenwald, I'm used to seeing him hurl repeated charges of "lying", sometimes too hastily, but when it comes to those who invented the "grooming" panic, he holds back. His language is much more circuitous and hesitant: the harshest he gets is "it seems like a very dishonest and dangerous way of trying to conduct what ought to be a nuanced and sensitive and careful debate about what children should and shouldn't be taught in schools". I appreciate the need for nuance, but I don't understand why he doesn't point out the lie more. Whether teaching LGBT-friendly values in schools is something you agree with 100% or 60% or 0%, the current campaign against it is indoctrinating people with a grotesque lie to serve the broader purposes of a political faction.